Upload & Sell: On
| Re: Photogenic ION? Competitor to Vagabond mini-lithium? |
The Tronix website states that it is 400W (continuous) and 1200 Ws ... the VML handlles two Einsteins @ 1280 Ws.
The VML rates 200-250 flashes @ 1280 Ws @ 7sec/recycle
Tronix Explorer Mini rates 50 flashes @ 1200 Ws @ 4sec/recycle
Tronix Explorer Mini rates 180-200 flashes @ 500 Ws
I see the SLA being able to generate a faster recycle time than the LI, but I\'m still a bit confused @ how that makes the Tronix compatible with more flashes. And if the Tronix is compatible with more flashes than the VML, doesn\'t that put the Photogenic in a similar quandary ... and wouldn\'t Photogenic need to be safeguarding themselves by indicating \"non-compatibility\" issues if they exist.
Please excuse my \"grossly\" limited electronics knowledge, but are we not just filling capacitors in the flash from the battery via the inverter. The slower \"fill rate\" of the the LI versions taking longer to fill the caps in the flash, but once the caps are filled ... how does the SLA vs. LI issue affect compatibility? ... and what spec is it that makes the VML / Photogenic inverter \"smallish\" compared to the Tronix inverter?
The Photogenic rates @ 120W (continuous), so I get how that makes for a slower recycle time than the 400W (continuous) Tronix ... but I still don\'t get how that makes it (Photogenic/VML) less compatible. Isn\'t that kinda like saying that Alkaline vs. Lithium vs. Ni-Cd are not compatible in a given strobe because they have different discharge rates? Sure, they take a different amount of time to fill the caps, but once the caps are filled